jackthemondoe
-
Posts
22 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
If you know the law there is nothing to clarify if yow doe it is well above your station read the previous quotes get a feel for how complex this is, soon me will find out if the big cheque book crew are on board as me say telephone numbers. Some people walk the walk some walk the walk and talk the talk the beak said time r u off your ed do you know what u r getting into me said to the beak no me not off me ed but out mybrains this was not received very well , this is not messers court i have to create a different ATE how else could i trade against big guns i only have a small gun but alot of bottle
-
Ok part warm the industry is all about party jellie, in the early days me thought with my stupid mentality i could boo em off they would back down in my previous lives i have put sum on notice of high court that worked, these crews it did not and i understand the comments to the factory revved em up like got advice take bar out of factory u produce beta gear and mine looks good from 500 mtrs, the sad part about this the true claimant is a protected party and been deprived use 5 years. That why me said in this industry ,golf,hand shake ,closing ranks and all that jazz but me the legal anti grunt with pointy ears when the manufacturer Md as his running shoes on thats a laff . When the manufacturers generals say we are very sorry got the lettos 5 years later not sorted cant use the scrap its not a washing machine this is to the death yea man
-
How could i name the retailer with a live case in progress Citizens advice/trading standards recorded complaint july 2013 Trading standards local signed for documents last week retailer/manufacturer,certification body all the other non parties not yet aware will be on 18.7.2017 Back at case management soon where it was likely a Single joint expert witness would be ordered plus other directions. Defendant was asked to file some other docs before hearing in that bundle they requested more time for manufacturer to respond and in this bundle they also stated it would allow a window for ADR/MEDIATION during 15 months this flag has never been waved till now. About the posts i am not having a pop at this forum it is not connected to the industry, as i said the ones that are remove the postings even when you tap dance around the issue. Another point very easy to give bias spin to all it may be all lies,look at the lingo i use where would a grunt get this from. Any one taking the kings shilling from TS knows these statements are bang on. If there is a proven safety issue i have won the case and also there are enough clues in the posts to guess the product then you would no some of the players involved i can not state this.
-
There is no counterclaim at present a part 36.6 is a offer to settle this may be their adr the offer would not come unless the manufacturer was in loop, a part 20 would join in the big guns what may effect their reputation and i must be fair they do have a good reputation however the retailer has much adverse, took to court TS , bad press daily mail lots of bad reviews the list goes on and they have been leaned on by the drat and punished disabled people the dirts all out their me would love to type this in for all to google then ya see me not speak with fork tongue yea man
-
sorry i missed that question a joe joey grunt all the same jazz member of the public what i call believers , believers are good people that get kicked in the nuts rolled they know no beta , me no joe i have bin shopped to the justice minister and had a petition presented to the house of commons about a site i own. Riddle for people half sensible who would do that. I will ask the question again case in fast track , defendant at next hearing wants time to consider part 20 and mentions ADR does he mean a part 36 offer to stop proceedings could this be a ambush to say to the court we tried to settle pre trial , the prob with this i could be 10k down where i have a strong case but then depends what you may win at trial.
-
When i have tried to obtain information from industry related forums the account is blocked posts are erased and senior members replies are also erased where they may have wanted to hear about it. A case like this could easily end up in the courts of appeal any legal person would pick out bullet points SOG/Protected party/5 non parties /multi track/fast track/Single joint instruction/ multi casemanagement/direct access barrister/retailer/part 20 manufacturer/Certification body BSI/poss part 34/poss part 36/poss 1 -2 day trial/multiple apps so someone in the know would say costs could well be telephone numbers thats why the grunt consumer takes it lying down. In my life i have learnt rule 1 never trade with the establishment rule 2 if you do have a fall guy the latter if you lose ya doe pay thats how it rolls no wig likes rule 2 . So back to my original question can ADR be retrospective if so the problem with this the body what certificated the unit there name is in court as a non party for possible breach of en1949 why would i trust that body.
-
The players i am trading against are well rehearsed the joe thinks all are straight point of sale ,if someone wants to dodge the bullet in their interests to delay you may bottle it. Any joe reading this be warned if you instruct you may buy their BMW you win but get no costs award hollow victory what good is that. Joe thinks sog and CRA there to protect think again these are in place to protect business Back to the 5 year deal ya moan ,waive flags,beat your drum reply we will do it tomorrow. Joe gets revved up fires missiles at non parties CEO S ban staff from speaking pull shutters down , why well the manufacturers what supply the producer all **** in the same pot the trade body what certs plays golf its one of them, when MD s sit on each others board how do you break through the force fields you bang it in court then the retailer has lost the whip hand tomorrow will come for one of the parties.
-
TS are aware of the civil case for over 12 months , you know when something is wrong when you phone TS hub when call handler checks case file they put you on hold out comes GCHQ. I have sent docs recorded to head of TS local includes photos,BSI En1949,2 x manufacturers installation instructions,third party cert on en1948,conform cert from supplying potential part 20 this includes operators hand book safety instructions etc, if this part is proven the defendants case and part 20 will fail. Wot does my box in the joe can not talk to local TS and what is out of order if i have to study TS enforcement procedures and legislation i will have to learn their job. TS have powers to access manufacturers technical files on safety issues pre trial i would have to wait use a part34 witness summons that is alot of grief . Question who pulls TS strings.
-
Thanks for input but purchase date 2012 i think now case on move defendant not keen to run with single joint expert ,multi track could have had three , what surprised me did not think DJ could allocate 40k case to fast. The defendant throughout takes no blame so now they have wrote to the part 20 there may be some shift in position. In a case like this costs are telephone numbers by doing lots of work costs are kept lower but i may have made a mistake shopin them to TS it might open up pandoras box because how can you have a back door deal if there is a product that does not have correct ventilation from new and cause carbon monoxide poisoning and i was a gas safe engineer with the lpg component . Would and part 20 want this on their table with a show on the blast this year.
-
product bought new not of satisfactory quality /fit for purpose sog 1979 sec14 , 5 years on still have cannot use claimant protected party directions hearing soon at this stage burden of proof not established hope next hearing what shocks me as the joe thresh hold of proof presents as criminal the DJ at last hearing had lots of docs but he phoned the doctor at hearing speaker phone. He advised if go to trial direct access junior barrister what i accept would be required. What i am trying to establish burden of proof unit faulty first 2 months up to 30 faults been back to factory with 5 inherent faults if i get positive SJE hope other side bottle it or either side part 36 i have been on this 4 years in this time i have not found another joe dun this tour of duty so all that read you make find out the real deal what may help others in the future
-
Tried that not an option the facts are the consumer is a lone solider TS will not help which i fully understand and not complaining about what i notice when phone TS they put me on hold go see someone come back sidestep i phoned TS not GCHQ it would of cost 10k to get case to this point this is how retailers get off what realistic chance has the lone solider consumer got and for recovering all costs at trial when you win risky.
-
That is a fair point but if i released to much info all would work out what parties involved part 20 would involve other side with 100 mill turnover per year. What shocks me now trading standards hub will not speak local TS have not yet responded to my files,there are 5 other non parties involved at trial it may involve a part34 to include technical files and to compound problems there is not any 1 sje in the uk that can undertake this work a best match only option so any one reading this will know this is a lot of work for 1 lip
-
This has been in the court system 15 months first acheived default judgement that was set aside ,next stage appointment of a litigant friend that was ordered current stage case management defendant whats more time to wait for manufacturer to respond on part 20 joining into case in their bundle they mention adr/mediation i thought this was not possible in this type pf case What they are not aware i have alerted trading standards to poss safety breach of product if correct a recall of over 1000 may happen but this would be a criminal investigation Having studied the hse site i have provided all docs to the TS concerned with this in motion how could ADR take place ?
-
Live fast track in progress at case management directions hearing soon talk about sje witness defendant has asked for adjournment to allow time for poss apt part 20 but they also mention window for adr/mediation could some one explain poss outcomes it was in multi track provisional 40k
-
If a product /contract was sold on the basis it had not been built at point of deposit and there was a 3 month build date to delivery -but another product was supplied 3 months later that was not the product ordered -but same spec and model and new due to it prob was a demonstrator at some other dealer -would this give rise to a claim on section 13 SOGA -due to the fact the consumer was lead to belive it was being built to order after deposit paid at show and there was not any available stock
Latest
Our Picks
Reclaim the right Ltd
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS